Gambling Catholic Teaching
2021年5月7日Register here: http://gg.gg/uixxa
The passion for gambling risks becoming an enslavement.” This is also the argument the Massachusetts Catholic Conference made in its legislative testimony: “The Roman Catholic Church is not opposed to gambling,” wrote the conference, citing the above passage from the catechism. I would like to know the Catholic perspective on gambling. One of the churches I go to has buses that take people to the casino and another has pro. We hope to discuss what constitutes gambling and what the teaching of Jesus Christ says regarding its moral significance. Since the Bible is the highest moral standard ever known, and since it reveals the will of the God who created us all, we will appeal to it as the supreme standard (2 Tim. 14:37; John 17:17; Matt. The Church does not forbid gambling, so long as it is done responsibly and the money used for gambling is not needed for other legitimate obligations. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: Games of chance (card games, etc.) or wagers are not in themselves contrary to justice. Gambling undermines the Biblical work ethic because, instead of accomplishing productive labor that benefits others, the gambler seeks to get something for nothing by taking what other people have earned.
*Gambling Catholic Teachings
*Is Gambling Against Catholic Teaching
*Catholic Teaching On Gambling
Gambling, or gaming, is the staking of money or other thing of value on the issue of a game of chance. It thus belongs to the class of aleatory contracts which the gain or loss of the parties depends on an uncertain event. It is not gambling, in the strict sense, if a bet is laid on the issue of a game of skill like billiards or football. The issue must depend on chance, as in dice, or partly on chance, partly on skill, as in whist. Moreover, in ordinary parlance, a person who plays for small stakes to give zest to the game is not said to gamble; gambling connotes playing for high stakes.
In its moral aspect, although gambling usually has a bad meaning, yet we may apply to it what was said about betting. On certain conditions, and apart from excess or scandal, it is not sinful to stake money on the issue of a game of chance any more than it is sinful to insure one’s property against risk, or deal in futures on the produce market. As I may make a free gift of my own property to another if I choose, so I may agree with another to hand over to him a sum of money if the issue of a game of cards is other than I expect, while he agrees to do the same in my favour in the contrary event.
Theologians commonly require four conditions so that gaming may not be illicit.
*What is staked must belong to the gambler and must be at his free disposal. It is wrong, therefore, for the lawyer to stake the money of his client, or for anyone to gamble with what is necessary for the maintenance of his wife and children.
*The gambler must act freely, without unjust compulsion.
*There must be no fraud in the transaction, although the usual ruses of the game may be allowed. It is unlawful, accordingly, to mark the cards, but it is permissible to conceal carefully from an opponent the number of trump cards one holds.
*Finally, there must be some sort of equality between the parties to make the contract equitable; it would be unfair for a combination of two expert whist players to take the money of a couple of mere novices at the game.
If any of these conditions be wanting, gambling becomes more or less wrong; and, besides, there is generally an element of danger in it which is quite sufficient to account for the bad name which it has. In most people gambling arouses keen excitement, and quickly develops into a passion which is difficult to control. If indulged in to excess it leads to loss of time, and usually of money; to an idle and useless life spent in the midst of bad company and unwholesome surroundings; and to scandal which is a source of sin and ruin to others. It panders to the craving for excitement and in many countries it has become so prevalent that it rivals drunkenness in its destructive effects on the lives of the people. It is obvious that the moral aspect of the question is not essentially different if for a game of chance is substituted a horse-race, a football or cricket match, or the price of stock or produce at some future date. Although the issue in these cases seldom depends upon chance, still the moral aspect of betting upon it is the same in so far as the issue is unknown or uncertain to the parties who make the contract. Time bargains, difference transactions, options, and other speculative dealings on the exchanges, which are so common nowadays, add to the malice of gambling special evils of their own. Enzo casino no deposit bonus 2020. They lead to the disturbance of the natural prices of commodities and securities, do grave injury to producers and consumers of those commodities, and are frequently attended by such unlawful methods of influencing prices as the dissemination of false reports, cornering, and the fierce contests of ’bulls’ and ’bears’, i.e. of the dealers who wish respectively to raise or lower prices.
Hitherto we have prescinded from positive law in our treatment of the question of gambling. It is, however, a matter on which both the civil and the canon law have much to say. In the United States the subject lies outside the province of the Federal Government, but many of the States make gambling a penal offence when the bet is upon an election, a horse-race, or a game of chance. Betting contracts and securities given upon a bet are often made void. In England the Gaming Act, 1845, voids contracts made by way of gaming and wagering; and the Gaming Act, 1892, renders null and void any promise, express or implied, to pay any person any sum of money under, or in respect of, any contract or agreement rendered null and void by the Gaming Act, 1845, or to pay any sum of money by way of commission, fee, reward, or otherwise, in respect of any such contract or agreement, or of any services in relation thereto or in connection therewith.
From very early times gambling was forbidden by canon law. Two of the oldest (41, 42) among the so-called canons of the Apostles forbade games of chance under pain of excommunication to clergy and laity alike. The 79th canon of the Council of Elvira (306) decreed that one of the faithful who had been guilty of gambling might be, on amendment, restored to communion after the lapse of a year. A homily (the famous ’De Aleatoribus’) long ascribed by St. Cyprian, but by modern scholars variously attributed to Popes Victor I, Callistus I, and Melchiades, and which undoubtedly is a very early and interesting monument of Christian antiquity, is a vigorous denunciation of gambling. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215), by a decree subsequently inserted in the ’Corpus Juris’, forbade clerics to play or to be present at games of chance. Some authorities, such as Aubespine, have attempted to explain the severity of the ancient canons against gambling by supposing that idolatry was often connected with it in practice. The pieces that were played with were small-sized idols, or images of the gods, which were invoked by the players for good luck. However, as Benedict XIV remarks, this can hardly be true, as in that case the penalties would have been still more severe.
Profane writers of antiquity are almost as severe in their condemnation of gambling as are the councils of the Christian Church. Tacitus and Ammianus Marcellinus tell us that by gambling men are led into fraud, cheating, lying, perjury, theft, and other enormities; while Peter of Blois says that dice is the mother of perjury, theft, and sacrilege. The old canonists and theologians remark that although the canons generally mention only dice by name, yet under this appellation must be understood all games of chance; and even those that require skill, if they are played for money.Gambling Catholic Teachings
The Council of Trent contented itself with ordering all the ancient canons on the subject to be observed, and in general prescribed that the clergy were to abstain from unlawful games. As Benedict XIV remarks, it was left to the judgment of the bishops to decide what games should be held to be unlawful according to the different circumstances of person, place, and time. St. Charles Borromeo, in the first Synod of Milan, put the Tridentinedecree into execution, and drew up a list of games which were forbidden to the clergy, and another list of those that were allowed. Among those which he forbade were not only dicing in various forms, but also games something like our croquet and football. Other particular councils declared that playing at dice and cards was unbecoming and forbidden to clerics, and in general they forbade all games which were unbecoming to the clerical state. Thus, a council held at Bordeaux in 1583 decreed that the clergy were to abstain altogether from playing in public or in private at dice, cards, or any other forbidden and unbecoming game. The council held at Aix in 1585 forbade them to play at cards, dice or any other game of the like kind, and even to look on at the playing of such games. Another, held at Narbonne in 1609, decreed that clerics were not to play at dice, cards, or other unlawful and unbecoming games, especially in public.
There was some doubt as to whether chess was to be considered an unbecoming, and therefore, an unlawful, game for clerics. In the opinion of St. Peter Damian it was certainly unlawful. On one occasion he caught the Bishop of Florence playing chess, to while away the time when on a journey. The bishop tried to defend himself by saying that chess was not dice. The saint, however, refused to admit the distinction, especially as the bishop was playing in public. Scripture, he said, does not make express mention of chess, but it is comprised under the term dice. And Baronius defends the saint’sdoctrine. Some sciolist, he remarks, may say that St. Peter Damian was under a delusion in classing chess under dice, since chess is not a game of chance but calls for the exercise of much skill and talent. Let that be as it may, he proceeds, priests must at any rate be guided in their conduct by the words of St. Paul, who declared that what is not expedient, what is not edifying, is not allowed.Modern ecclesiastical law is less exacting in this matter. The provincial Councils of Westminster are content with prescribing that clerics must abstain from unlawful games. The Plenary School of Maynooth, held in 1900, says that since not a little time is occasionally lost, and idleness is fostered by playing cards, the priest should be on his guard against such games, especially where money is staked, lest he incur the reproach of being a gambler. He is also exhorted to deter the laity by word and example from betting at horse-races, especially when the stakes are high. The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore made a distinction between games which may not suitably be indulged in by a cleric, even when played in private, and games like cards which may be played for the sake of innocent recreation. It repeated the prohibition of the First Plenary Council of Baltimore that clerics are not to indulge in unlawful games, and only in moderation are to use those that are lawful, so as not to cause scandal. Nowadays, it is commonly held that positive ecclesiastical law only forbids games of chance, even to the clergy, when in themselves or for some extrinsic reason, such as loss of time or scandal, they are forbidden by the natural law.
Sources
FERRARIS, Prompta Bibliotheca, s.v. Ludus (Paris 1861); BENEDICT XIV, De Synodo diæcesana (Ferrari, 1756); HEFELE Conciliengeschichte (Freiburg, 1873), I; SLATER, A Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908), I; Ecclesiastical Review (New York, 1905), XXXII, 134; THOMASSIN, Vetus Eccl. Disciplina, III, III, cc. Xlv, xlvi; DESHAYES, in VACANT, Dict. de Thiol. cath., s.v. Aléatoires.About this pageIs Gambling Against Catholic Teaching
APA citation.Slater, T.(1909).Gambling. In The Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm
MLA citation.Slater, Thomas.’Gambling.’The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 6.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1909.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Sierra L. Fisher.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. September 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor.Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmaster at newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can’t reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.Copyright © 2020 by Kevin Knight. Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.CONTACT US | ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT
My Baptist friend says that gambling is a sin. Yet, I know many good Catholics who visit places like Atlantic City and play slot machines and the like, or schools that have casino nights as fund raisers. What should I say to my friend?
Despite our preferences, the popularity of bubble craps is growing in casinos worldwide such as in Reno and Atlantic City. We have other articles that we believe you will also enjoy reading and we list them below: The Craps Table Layout. Bubble craps atlantic city. Currently there is only one place to play bubble craps in Atlantic City: The Wild Wild West Casino. Unlike the “Shoot to Win” Craps machines that you see in Las Vegas, the bubble craps at Wild Wild West operates a little differently. A shooting player is never designated, for example.
Gambling, whether it involves games of chance (e.g. card games), wagers or betting, or even lotteries, is not intrinsically evil (Catechism, No. 2404). However, a person may only engage in these activities with a strict adherence to virtue. First, he must act with temperance, whereby he keeps his passions and emotions under the control of reason, acts with moderation, and uses material goods in a good way and in accord with the circumstances of his life.
Second, the virtue of justice governs both the game itself as well as the person playing the game. The game must be fair and all players must have an equal chance of winning. In justice, the player’s gambling must not prevent him from meeting his obligations to support himself or his family, pay his debts, or fulfill other responsibilities.
Consequently, a person must be careful not to become addicted to gambling, because of its excitement or the possibility of making ’quick, easy, big money.’ He must not risk money that is necessary for the livelihood of himself or those entrusted to his care. Moreover, a gambler should always weigh whether that money could be better used for something of clear, tangible benefit. Even a wealthy person who may have great disposable income must use moderation, recognizing that the money risked on frivolous gambling could be used to help those less fortunate.
With this foundation in mind, several ’classic’ rules govern gambling: Catholic Teaching On Gambling
*A player must be free to dispose of the stakes wagered in the game. He must be able to accept the risk of losing the stakes without incurring harm to himself or to others. Basically, the stakes should be ’disposable’ money.
*The player must make the gamble with full knowledge and consent.
*All players must have an equal chance of winning.
*The game must be fair. All fraud or deception is prohibited.
*While everyone enjoys winning, the motive for playing the game should be one of pleasure rather than of gain. One must not depend upon gambling for one’s livelihood. (Prummer, Handbook of Moral Theology).
Even if one conscientiously follows these rules, he must always remain on guard. While gambling can be fun, it can also be very addictive. In a recent study, Harvard Medical School found that 1.29 percent of the adult population in America are pathological gamblers: this equates to 2.2 million addicted gamblers. Another 4 percent are considered ’problem gamblers.’ Such addiction is a spiritual enslavement that a person allows to happen.
Besides addiction, a spiritual problem emerges when a person thinks he can make the quick, easy, big money gambling rather than by simply working hard. Here he accepts great risks that could have dire consequences. Such a condition deteriorates when a person loses money he should use for himself or his family and even accrues greater debt.
Be on guard, because gambling is a prevalent, luring, big business. Last year, the Council on Compulsive Gambling of New Jersey estimated that betting on last year’s Denver-Atlanta Super Bowl reached $4 billion not including side bets and office pools. As of 1999, 37 states and the District of Columbia sponsored lotteries, and 26 states have legalized some form of casino gambling. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, Americans spend $600 billion annually in legal gambling operations, at least $100 billion more than they spend for food. The revenues of the gambling industry continue to rise each year.
When I was studying at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Philadelphia, two fellow seminarians and I ventured to Atlantic City when we had a free weekend. Of course, we wanted to see this attraction, which was new at the time. I think we planned to spend $20 on the quarter slot machines, of course winning a little, losing a little, but in the end losing everything. Granted there was that temptation to keep going, thinking, ’The next one will be the jack pot,’ but we held to the limit. I was appalled though by how many people spent hours loading the slot machines with multiple coins. Worse yet, I remember watching the action at a poker table and seeing the well-dressed, distinguished manager approach one of the players with a document to sign, which basically mortgaged his home. While I am sure most people had innocent fun, never really expecting to win, I wonder how many went away sad, regretting their actions. Herein we see the problem of gambling.
St. Augustine said, ’The Devil invented gambling.’ Maybe so. Remember, as our Lord hung on the cross, the Roman soldiers threw dice to see who would get His tunic, seeking only their own benefit while being oblivious to the greater good (Jn 19:24). Granted, there is nothing wrong with gambling as long as it is kept within the confines of virtue. Nevertheless, one must be very careful and vigilant. Acknowledgement
Saunders, Rev. William. ’Is Gambling a Sin?’ Arlington Catholic Herald.
This article is reprinted with permission from Arlington Catholic Herald.The Author
Father William Saunders is pastor of Our Lady of Hope parish in Potomac Falls, Virginia. He is dean of the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College. The above article is a ’Straight Answers’ column he wrote for the Arlington Catholic Herald. Father Saunders is the author
https://diarynote-jp.indered.space
The passion for gambling risks becoming an enslavement.” This is also the argument the Massachusetts Catholic Conference made in its legislative testimony: “The Roman Catholic Church is not opposed to gambling,” wrote the conference, citing the above passage from the catechism. I would like to know the Catholic perspective on gambling. One of the churches I go to has buses that take people to the casino and another has pro. We hope to discuss what constitutes gambling and what the teaching of Jesus Christ says regarding its moral significance. Since the Bible is the highest moral standard ever known, and since it reveals the will of the God who created us all, we will appeal to it as the supreme standard (2 Tim. 14:37; John 17:17; Matt. The Church does not forbid gambling, so long as it is done responsibly and the money used for gambling is not needed for other legitimate obligations. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: Games of chance (card games, etc.) or wagers are not in themselves contrary to justice. Gambling undermines the Biblical work ethic because, instead of accomplishing productive labor that benefits others, the gambler seeks to get something for nothing by taking what other people have earned.
*Gambling Catholic Teachings
*Is Gambling Against Catholic Teaching
*Catholic Teaching On Gambling
Gambling, or gaming, is the staking of money or other thing of value on the issue of a game of chance. It thus belongs to the class of aleatory contracts which the gain or loss of the parties depends on an uncertain event. It is not gambling, in the strict sense, if a bet is laid on the issue of a game of skill like billiards or football. The issue must depend on chance, as in dice, or partly on chance, partly on skill, as in whist. Moreover, in ordinary parlance, a person who plays for small stakes to give zest to the game is not said to gamble; gambling connotes playing for high stakes.
In its moral aspect, although gambling usually has a bad meaning, yet we may apply to it what was said about betting. On certain conditions, and apart from excess or scandal, it is not sinful to stake money on the issue of a game of chance any more than it is sinful to insure one’s property against risk, or deal in futures on the produce market. As I may make a free gift of my own property to another if I choose, so I may agree with another to hand over to him a sum of money if the issue of a game of cards is other than I expect, while he agrees to do the same in my favour in the contrary event.
Theologians commonly require four conditions so that gaming may not be illicit.
*What is staked must belong to the gambler and must be at his free disposal. It is wrong, therefore, for the lawyer to stake the money of his client, or for anyone to gamble with what is necessary for the maintenance of his wife and children.
*The gambler must act freely, without unjust compulsion.
*There must be no fraud in the transaction, although the usual ruses of the game may be allowed. It is unlawful, accordingly, to mark the cards, but it is permissible to conceal carefully from an opponent the number of trump cards one holds.
*Finally, there must be some sort of equality between the parties to make the contract equitable; it would be unfair for a combination of two expert whist players to take the money of a couple of mere novices at the game.
If any of these conditions be wanting, gambling becomes more or less wrong; and, besides, there is generally an element of danger in it which is quite sufficient to account for the bad name which it has. In most people gambling arouses keen excitement, and quickly develops into a passion which is difficult to control. If indulged in to excess it leads to loss of time, and usually of money; to an idle and useless life spent in the midst of bad company and unwholesome surroundings; and to scandal which is a source of sin and ruin to others. It panders to the craving for excitement and in many countries it has become so prevalent that it rivals drunkenness in its destructive effects on the lives of the people. It is obvious that the moral aspect of the question is not essentially different if for a game of chance is substituted a horse-race, a football or cricket match, or the price of stock or produce at some future date. Although the issue in these cases seldom depends upon chance, still the moral aspect of betting upon it is the same in so far as the issue is unknown or uncertain to the parties who make the contract. Time bargains, difference transactions, options, and other speculative dealings on the exchanges, which are so common nowadays, add to the malice of gambling special evils of their own. Enzo casino no deposit bonus 2020. They lead to the disturbance of the natural prices of commodities and securities, do grave injury to producers and consumers of those commodities, and are frequently attended by such unlawful methods of influencing prices as the dissemination of false reports, cornering, and the fierce contests of ’bulls’ and ’bears’, i.e. of the dealers who wish respectively to raise or lower prices.
Hitherto we have prescinded from positive law in our treatment of the question of gambling. It is, however, a matter on which both the civil and the canon law have much to say. In the United States the subject lies outside the province of the Federal Government, but many of the States make gambling a penal offence when the bet is upon an election, a horse-race, or a game of chance. Betting contracts and securities given upon a bet are often made void. In England the Gaming Act, 1845, voids contracts made by way of gaming and wagering; and the Gaming Act, 1892, renders null and void any promise, express or implied, to pay any person any sum of money under, or in respect of, any contract or agreement rendered null and void by the Gaming Act, 1845, or to pay any sum of money by way of commission, fee, reward, or otherwise, in respect of any such contract or agreement, or of any services in relation thereto or in connection therewith.
From very early times gambling was forbidden by canon law. Two of the oldest (41, 42) among the so-called canons of the Apostles forbade games of chance under pain of excommunication to clergy and laity alike. The 79th canon of the Council of Elvira (306) decreed that one of the faithful who had been guilty of gambling might be, on amendment, restored to communion after the lapse of a year. A homily (the famous ’De Aleatoribus’) long ascribed by St. Cyprian, but by modern scholars variously attributed to Popes Victor I, Callistus I, and Melchiades, and which undoubtedly is a very early and interesting monument of Christian antiquity, is a vigorous denunciation of gambling. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215), by a decree subsequently inserted in the ’Corpus Juris’, forbade clerics to play or to be present at games of chance. Some authorities, such as Aubespine, have attempted to explain the severity of the ancient canons against gambling by supposing that idolatry was often connected with it in practice. The pieces that were played with were small-sized idols, or images of the gods, which were invoked by the players for good luck. However, as Benedict XIV remarks, this can hardly be true, as in that case the penalties would have been still more severe.
Profane writers of antiquity are almost as severe in their condemnation of gambling as are the councils of the Christian Church. Tacitus and Ammianus Marcellinus tell us that by gambling men are led into fraud, cheating, lying, perjury, theft, and other enormities; while Peter of Blois says that dice is the mother of perjury, theft, and sacrilege. The old canonists and theologians remark that although the canons generally mention only dice by name, yet under this appellation must be understood all games of chance; and even those that require skill, if they are played for money.Gambling Catholic Teachings
The Council of Trent contented itself with ordering all the ancient canons on the subject to be observed, and in general prescribed that the clergy were to abstain from unlawful games. As Benedict XIV remarks, it was left to the judgment of the bishops to decide what games should be held to be unlawful according to the different circumstances of person, place, and time. St. Charles Borromeo, in the first Synod of Milan, put the Tridentinedecree into execution, and drew up a list of games which were forbidden to the clergy, and another list of those that were allowed. Among those which he forbade were not only dicing in various forms, but also games something like our croquet and football. Other particular councils declared that playing at dice and cards was unbecoming and forbidden to clerics, and in general they forbade all games which were unbecoming to the clerical state. Thus, a council held at Bordeaux in 1583 decreed that the clergy were to abstain altogether from playing in public or in private at dice, cards, or any other forbidden and unbecoming game. The council held at Aix in 1585 forbade them to play at cards, dice or any other game of the like kind, and even to look on at the playing of such games. Another, held at Narbonne in 1609, decreed that clerics were not to play at dice, cards, or other unlawful and unbecoming games, especially in public.
There was some doubt as to whether chess was to be considered an unbecoming, and therefore, an unlawful, game for clerics. In the opinion of St. Peter Damian it was certainly unlawful. On one occasion he caught the Bishop of Florence playing chess, to while away the time when on a journey. The bishop tried to defend himself by saying that chess was not dice. The saint, however, refused to admit the distinction, especially as the bishop was playing in public. Scripture, he said, does not make express mention of chess, but it is comprised under the term dice. And Baronius defends the saint’sdoctrine. Some sciolist, he remarks, may say that St. Peter Damian was under a delusion in classing chess under dice, since chess is not a game of chance but calls for the exercise of much skill and talent. Let that be as it may, he proceeds, priests must at any rate be guided in their conduct by the words of St. Paul, who declared that what is not expedient, what is not edifying, is not allowed.Modern ecclesiastical law is less exacting in this matter. The provincial Councils of Westminster are content with prescribing that clerics must abstain from unlawful games. The Plenary School of Maynooth, held in 1900, says that since not a little time is occasionally lost, and idleness is fostered by playing cards, the priest should be on his guard against such games, especially where money is staked, lest he incur the reproach of being a gambler. He is also exhorted to deter the laity by word and example from betting at horse-races, especially when the stakes are high. The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore made a distinction between games which may not suitably be indulged in by a cleric, even when played in private, and games like cards which may be played for the sake of innocent recreation. It repeated the prohibition of the First Plenary Council of Baltimore that clerics are not to indulge in unlawful games, and only in moderation are to use those that are lawful, so as not to cause scandal. Nowadays, it is commonly held that positive ecclesiastical law only forbids games of chance, even to the clergy, when in themselves or for some extrinsic reason, such as loss of time or scandal, they are forbidden by the natural law.
Sources
FERRARIS, Prompta Bibliotheca, s.v. Ludus (Paris 1861); BENEDICT XIV, De Synodo diæcesana (Ferrari, 1756); HEFELE Conciliengeschichte (Freiburg, 1873), I; SLATER, A Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908), I; Ecclesiastical Review (New York, 1905), XXXII, 134; THOMASSIN, Vetus Eccl. Disciplina, III, III, cc. Xlv, xlvi; DESHAYES, in VACANT, Dict. de Thiol. cath., s.v. Aléatoires.About this pageIs Gambling Against Catholic Teaching
APA citation.Slater, T.(1909).Gambling. In The Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm
MLA citation.Slater, Thomas.’Gambling.’The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 6.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1909.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Sierra L. Fisher.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. September 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor.Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmaster at newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can’t reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.Copyright © 2020 by Kevin Knight. Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.CONTACT US | ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT
My Baptist friend says that gambling is a sin. Yet, I know many good Catholics who visit places like Atlantic City and play slot machines and the like, or schools that have casino nights as fund raisers. What should I say to my friend?
Despite our preferences, the popularity of bubble craps is growing in casinos worldwide such as in Reno and Atlantic City. We have other articles that we believe you will also enjoy reading and we list them below: The Craps Table Layout. Bubble craps atlantic city. Currently there is only one place to play bubble craps in Atlantic City: The Wild Wild West Casino. Unlike the “Shoot to Win” Craps machines that you see in Las Vegas, the bubble craps at Wild Wild West operates a little differently. A shooting player is never designated, for example.
Gambling, whether it involves games of chance (e.g. card games), wagers or betting, or even lotteries, is not intrinsically evil (Catechism, No. 2404). However, a person may only engage in these activities with a strict adherence to virtue. First, he must act with temperance, whereby he keeps his passions and emotions under the control of reason, acts with moderation, and uses material goods in a good way and in accord with the circumstances of his life.
Second, the virtue of justice governs both the game itself as well as the person playing the game. The game must be fair and all players must have an equal chance of winning. In justice, the player’s gambling must not prevent him from meeting his obligations to support himself or his family, pay his debts, or fulfill other responsibilities.
Consequently, a person must be careful not to become addicted to gambling, because of its excitement or the possibility of making ’quick, easy, big money.’ He must not risk money that is necessary for the livelihood of himself or those entrusted to his care. Moreover, a gambler should always weigh whether that money could be better used for something of clear, tangible benefit. Even a wealthy person who may have great disposable income must use moderation, recognizing that the money risked on frivolous gambling could be used to help those less fortunate.
With this foundation in mind, several ’classic’ rules govern gambling: Catholic Teaching On Gambling
*A player must be free to dispose of the stakes wagered in the game. He must be able to accept the risk of losing the stakes without incurring harm to himself or to others. Basically, the stakes should be ’disposable’ money.
*The player must make the gamble with full knowledge and consent.
*All players must have an equal chance of winning.
*The game must be fair. All fraud or deception is prohibited.
*While everyone enjoys winning, the motive for playing the game should be one of pleasure rather than of gain. One must not depend upon gambling for one’s livelihood. (Prummer, Handbook of Moral Theology).
Even if one conscientiously follows these rules, he must always remain on guard. While gambling can be fun, it can also be very addictive. In a recent study, Harvard Medical School found that 1.29 percent of the adult population in America are pathological gamblers: this equates to 2.2 million addicted gamblers. Another 4 percent are considered ’problem gamblers.’ Such addiction is a spiritual enslavement that a person allows to happen.
Besides addiction, a spiritual problem emerges when a person thinks he can make the quick, easy, big money gambling rather than by simply working hard. Here he accepts great risks that could have dire consequences. Such a condition deteriorates when a person loses money he should use for himself or his family and even accrues greater debt.
Be on guard, because gambling is a prevalent, luring, big business. Last year, the Council on Compulsive Gambling of New Jersey estimated that betting on last year’s Denver-Atlanta Super Bowl reached $4 billion not including side bets and office pools. As of 1999, 37 states and the District of Columbia sponsored lotteries, and 26 states have legalized some form of casino gambling. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, Americans spend $600 billion annually in legal gambling operations, at least $100 billion more than they spend for food. The revenues of the gambling industry continue to rise each year.
When I was studying at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Philadelphia, two fellow seminarians and I ventured to Atlantic City when we had a free weekend. Of course, we wanted to see this attraction, which was new at the time. I think we planned to spend $20 on the quarter slot machines, of course winning a little, losing a little, but in the end losing everything. Granted there was that temptation to keep going, thinking, ’The next one will be the jack pot,’ but we held to the limit. I was appalled though by how many people spent hours loading the slot machines with multiple coins. Worse yet, I remember watching the action at a poker table and seeing the well-dressed, distinguished manager approach one of the players with a document to sign, which basically mortgaged his home. While I am sure most people had innocent fun, never really expecting to win, I wonder how many went away sad, regretting their actions. Herein we see the problem of gambling.
St. Augustine said, ’The Devil invented gambling.’ Maybe so. Remember, as our Lord hung on the cross, the Roman soldiers threw dice to see who would get His tunic, seeking only their own benefit while being oblivious to the greater good (Jn 19:24). Granted, there is nothing wrong with gambling as long as it is kept within the confines of virtue. Nevertheless, one must be very careful and vigilant. Acknowledgement
Saunders, Rev. William. ’Is Gambling a Sin?’ Arlington Catholic Herald.
This article is reprinted with permission from Arlington Catholic Herald.The Author
Father William Saunders is pastor of Our Lady of Hope parish in Potomac Falls, Virginia. He is dean of the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College. The above article is a ’Straight Answers’ column he wrote for the Arlington Catholic Herald. Father Saunders is the author
https://diarynote-jp.indered.space
コメント